The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
99-7002•Arthur Lee Tillman v. United States of America
99-7002Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitMar 29, 2000
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-7002
ARTHUR LEE TILLMAN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
District Judge. (CA-99-81-MU-3-1)
Submitted: March 23, 2000 Decided: March 29, 2000
Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Arthur Lee Tillman, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Arthur Lee Tillman appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. We have reviewed
the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and
dismiss on the reasoning of the district court. See Tillman v.
United States, No. CA-99-81-MU-3-1 (W.D.N.C. June 22, 1999). We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.